Singer vs. Wolf: The Environment is Important

While the Wolf reading from Tuesday argues against the importance and validity of the "environment argument," Singer provides a wake up call emphasizing the urgent need to make policy changes to help protect the environment. Wolf would say that when people oppose free trade because it is harmful to the environment, it is really a disguise of protectionism, because free trade and economic development do not harm the environment any more than inefficiency in a poor developing country. On the other hand, Singer makes a persuasive argument about protecting our "one atmosphere" against global warming and other types of devastating pollution.

Singer also brings up an interesting argument about allotting a particular quota of carbon that can be emitted per person in the world. He also offers ideas on how this policy could be controlled and readjusted for changes in population, so as not to encourage population increases. One important distinction that Singer makes is between the various environment arguments which are outlined below:

Time-Slice Argument: regardless of environmental damage done in the past (particularly during the industrial revolutions in developed countries such as the US and Europe), the slate and therefore the blame should be wiped clean. This means that the developed countries are not obligated to take on the sole responsibility of the damage, but rather the entire world should work together to begin protecting the environment more efficiently.

Historical Approach: You break it, you fix it, basically the developed countries made the most damage so it is up to them to figure out (and pay for) the remedies

Worst-off Argument: The worst-off countries should be helped no matter what